Since
1999, Housing Opportunities Made Equal has administered a program called
the Greater Buffalo Community Housing Center. Born from the settlement
of the Comer v. Kemp class-action suit, the Community Housing
Center was the brainchild of attorneys for the plaintiffs who understood
that odds were the majority of new Section 8 vouchers obtained in the
settlement would be used to rent housing in neighborhoods characterized
by concentrations of poverty and racial segregation.
After a
national search, HOME and the Buffalo Federation of Neighborhood Centers
were selected to administer this program which—in the course of
providing a range of services to more than 6,800 clients—has helped
2,143 families lease housing. As a result of the efforts of the CHC,
70 percent of clients chose to rent housing in middle income census
tracts—with an increasing number choosing to move beyond the City Line.
Why mobility?
Historically, neighborhoods characterized by concentrations of poverty
and racial segregation have also struggled with poor quality public
services, under-performing schools, lack of access to retail and
employment opportunities, high crime rates and social disorganization,
and lack of access to social networks which could provide access to
employment opportunities.
While it
is only natural to look for housing in neighborhoods you know and feel
comfortable in, the purpose of the CHC was to expand the horizon of
Section 8 homeseekers and remove barriers which might otherwise prevent
them from moving—if they chose to.
New data
The
January-February issue of Poverty & Race (published by the
Poverty & Race Research Action Council) includes an article by scholars
Margery Austin Turner and Delores Acevedo-Garcia examining new data on
the impact of mobility programs. Looking at the Chicago-area
Gautreaux program, HUD’s now concluded Moving to Opportunity
program, and the newer Hope VI program shows some benefits have indeed
occurred, while for others the evidence is less certain.
There
appears to be clear evidence, that moving away from poverty-concentrated
neighborhoods increases families’ sense of neighborhood safety, and
decreases the stress which comes from worrying whether a family member
will become a crime victim.
Evidence
regarding educational success is less clear. While Gautreaux
families saw dramatic benefits (including higher rates of high school
graduation, college enrollment and full-time employment), Moving to
Opportunity families saw differing impacts. While girls enjoyed
academic success and engaged in less risky behaviors, boys (age 15-19)
actually smoked more and were arrested more often for property crimes.
Researchers did not discount the possibility that African-American
teenage males may have been the victim of racial profiling.
Gautreau (the nation’s first mobility program) families did
experience higher rates of employment and lower dependency on government
assistance. Data is mixed for more recent program participants, perhaps
because mobility will have only a long-term effect on employment.
At least
one additional benefit not originally anticipated has accrued:
improvements in public health. Whether through access of safer streets
and better public spaces, or healthier food choices adult obesity
decreased among families who moved to lower-poverty communities. Data
also indicate lower incidence of depression and psychological distress.
The
benefits of housing mobility in increasing opportunities are clear.
What is less clear is who—if anyone—will bear the cost of mobility
programs.
By
contrast, we understand that society will bear the cost of racial
segregation and entrenched poverty.
Toward fair
housing month
Each
April the nation commemorates passage of the Fair Housing Act by
celebrating Fair Housing Month.
While
this 1968 Act was undeniably a significant event in civil rights
history, the truth of the matter is that the flawed legislation signed
into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson was only passed by Congress
because of the wave of “urban unrest” which swept America in the days
following the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King. Nevertheless,
April is the month where all across America legislative bodies adopt
resolutions and chief executives sign proclamations reaffirming their
commitments to fair housing.
Buffalo
has marched to the beat of a different drummer. After coming under
intense criticism for its 2004 decision to reduce support for core fair
housing services by more than 82 percent, the Office of Strategic
Planning decided to use an outside advisory panel to recommend fair
housing funding for 2005-06. Even operating under constraints of a
reduced CDBG allocation, HOME was recommended for a substantial
increase—from $20,727 to $75,000.
On
February 1, a bare majority of the Common Council expressed its support
for fair housing by voting to cut nearly $55,000 from the allocation.
Thankfully April is also known as Poetry Month and Math Education
Month. We hope that both will be better celebrated in the City of Good
Neighbors.
Editor’s note: At the urging of HUD and the Office of Strategic
Planning, on February 22 the Common Council voted to restore fair
housing funding deleted four weeks before.
